Artificial intelligence has become a mainstream tool for jobseekers. Candidates are using AI to tailor CVs, refine cover letters, improve written communication and present their experience more effectively. According to two recent LinkedIn polls conducted by Talent, 74% of respondents have already used AI to write or tailor a CV or cover letter.
This shift has sparked concern across the recruitment industry, but I believe we need to be careful about how we frame the conversation.
The use of AI is not inherently a problem.
In many respects, it is a positive development.
The ability to leverage AI effectively is increasingly becoming a workplace skill in its own right. Across almost every profession, organisations are looking for employees who can use technology to improve productivity, solve problems faster and work more efficiently. Candidates who know how to use AI to communicate their experience clearly may be demonstrating an important capability rather than trying to gain an unfair advantage.
The challenge for recruiters is not that candidates are using AI.
The challenge is that everyone is using it.
As AI becomes more accessible, applications are becoming increasingly polished. Candidates who may have previously struggled to articulate their experience can now present themselves more effectively. Cover letters are more structured. CVs are more tailored. Achievements are more clearly expressed.
The result is that the overall quality of applications is improving.
At the same time, differentiation is becoming harder.
Recently, Talent advertised a role that attracted more than 200 applications in less than 48 hours. While high application volumes are not new, what is changing is the consistency of the applications themselves. More candidates appear relevant on paper. More candidates present compelling experience. More candidates are optimising their applications for both human readers and applicant tracking systems.
In our own research, 58% of respondents said AI-assisted applications are making candidate screening harder, while a further 13% believe they are forcing organisations to rethink assessment methods altogether.
Interestingly, candidates themselves recognise this shift.
In an online discussion about AI and recruitment, one jobseeker commented that there is now "pretty much no point in an online application without" AI assistance. Another described rebuilding their CV after discovering that applicant tracking systems were not correctly interpreting the formatting of their original document.
These comments reveal an important reality. Candidates are no longer simply applying for jobs. They are actively optimising applications for increasingly digital hiring processes.
This has led some people to describe recruitment as an AI arms race.
Candidates use AI to create applications.
Employers use AI to manage application volumes.
Recruiters sit in the middle, attempting to identify who genuinely has the skills, experience and potential to succeed.
However, I believe focusing on the technology misses the bigger point.
The real story is that AI is exposing weaknesses that have always existed within recruitment.
For too long, hiring decisions have sometimes relied too heavily on how well someone can write about doing a job rather than whether they can actually do it.
AI simply makes that weakness more visible.
A candidate can use AI to produce a compelling statement claiming they delivered a $10 million transformation program, led a major technology implementation or generated significant business outcomes.
That doesn't mean those achievements are false.
But it does mean recruiters and hiring managers need to move beyond the headline.
What was the biggest risk in that project?
How did they manage stakeholder resistance?
What trade-offs did they make along the way?
What would they do differently if given the opportunity to run the project again?
These are the questions that reveal genuine expertise.
AI can help a candidate communicate experience. It cannot replace experience itself.
This is why evidence-based hiring is becoming increasingly important.
We're already seeing organisations place greater emphasis on technical assessments, work sample testing, portfolio reviews, practical exercises and structured behavioural interviews. These methods provide a more accurate picture of capability than even the most polished application.
Reference checking is also becoming more valuable.
In an environment where candidates can use AI to strengthen how they present their achievements, references provide an additional source of evidence. They help validate claims, provide context around performance and offer insight into how an individual operates within a team, manages stakeholders and delivers outcomes.
For recruiters, this represents an opportunity rather than a threat.
The recruiters who will thrive in an AI-enabled hiring market will be those who become better assessors of capability. They will ask deeper questions, validate claims more rigorously and focus less on polished documents and more on demonstrated outcomes.
Candidates will continue using AI.
Recruiters will continue using AI.
Neither trend is likely to reverse.
The opportunity for our industry is not to resist this change, but to evolve alongside it.
Because in a world where anyone can produce a great CV, the real value of recruitment lies in uncovering the evidence, judgement and potential that sits behind it.